Rewrite `suspicious-library`, `resolve-rename` and `incr-prev-body-beyond-eof` `run-make` tests in `rmake.rs` format
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
Some oddly specific ignore flags in `incr-prev-body-beyond-eof`:
```rs
// ignore-none
// ignore-nvptx64-nvidia-cuda
```
it could be interesting to run a try job, but it seems there is no nvidia-cuda in the CI settings (`jobs.yml`).
try-job: armhf-gnu
Update `compiler-builtins` test to not clear essential env vars
Noticed in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/122580#issuecomment-2125755689, the `compiler-builtins` test failed on Windows for a `cargo` invocation because necessary env vars `TMP` and `TEMP` were cleared by `Command::env_clear`, causing temp dir eventually used by codegen to fallback to the Windows directory, which will trigger permission errors.
This PR removes the `env_clear` on the cargo invocation.
r? `@saethlin` (feel free to reroll, since you authored the test)
try-job: x86_64-msvc
try-job: test-various
Handle no values cfgs with `--print=check-cfg`
This PR fix a bug with `--print=check-cfg`, where no values cfgs where not printed since we only printed cfgs that had at least one values.
The representation I choose is `CFG=`, since it doesn't correspond to any valid config, it also IMO nicely complements the `values()` (to indicate no values). Representing the absence of value by the absence of the value.
So for `cfg(feature, values())` we would print `feature=`.
I also added the missing tracking issue number in the doc.
r? ```@petrochenkov```
Show files produced by `--emit foo` in json artifact notifications
Right now it is possible to ask `rustc` to save some intermediate representation into one or more files with `--emit=foo`, but figuring out what exactly was produced is difficult. This pull request adds information about `llvm_ir` and `asm` intermediate files into notifications produced by `--json=artifacts`.
Related discussion: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/easier-access-to-files-generated-by-emit-foo/20477
Motivation - `cargo-show-asm` parses those intermediate files and presents them in a user friendly way, but right now I have to apply some dirty hacks. Hacks make behavior confusing: https://github.com/hintron/computer-enhance/issues/35
This pull request introduces a new behavior: now `rustc` will emit a new artifact notification for every artifact type user asked to `--emit`, for example for `--emit asm` those will include all the `.s` files.
Most users won't notice this behavior, to be affected by it all of the following must hold:
- user must use `rustc` binary directly (when `cargo` invokes `rustc` - it consumes artifact notifications and doesn't emit anything)
- user must specify both `--emit xxx` and `--json artifacts`
- user must refuse to handle unknown artifact types
- user must disable incremental compilation (or deal with it better than cargo does, or use a workaround like `save-temps`) in order not to hit #88829 / #89149
With the exception of `tests/run-make/translation/test.rs`, which has a
syntax error.
The expected output in `rustdoc-error-lines/rmake.rs`'s required slight
tweaking.
The two `reproducible-build.rs` files need `// ignore-tidy-linelength`
because rustfmt produces lines longer than 100 chars, which tidy doesn't
like, yuk.
Rollup of 7 pull requests
Successful merges:
- #124655 (Add `-Zfixed-x18`)
- #125693 (Format all source files in `tests/coverage/`)
- #125700 (coverage: Avoid overflow when the MC/DC condition limit is exceeded)
- #125705 (Reintroduce name resolution check for trying to access locals from an inline const)
- #125708 (tier 3 target policy: clarify the point about producing assembly)
- #125715 (remove unneeded extern crate in rmake test)
- #125719 (Extract coverage-specific code out of `compiletest::runtest`)
r? `@ghost`
`@rustbot` modify labels: rollup
Make more of the test suite run on Mac Catalyst
Combined with https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/125225, the only failing parts of the test suite are in `tests/rustdoc-js`, `tests/rustdoc-js-std` and `tests/debuginfo`. Tested with:
```console
./x test --target=aarch64-apple-ios-macabi library/std
./x test --target=aarch64-apple-ios-macabi --skip=tests/rustdoc-js --skip=tests/rustdoc-js-std --skip=tests/debuginfo tests
```
Will probably put up a PR later to enable _running_ on (not just compiling for) Mac Catalyst in CI, though not sure where exactly I should do so? `src/ci/github-actions/jobs.yml`?
Note that I've deliberately _not_ enabled stack overflow handlers on iOS/tvOS/watchOS/visionOS (see https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/25872), but rather just skipped those tests, as it uses quite a few APIs that I'd be weary about getting rejected by the App Store (note that Swift doesn't do it on those platforms either).
r? ``@workingjubilee``
CC ``@thomcc``
``@rustbot`` label O-ios O-apple
Add `--print=check-cfg` to get the expected configs
This PR adds a new `--print` variant `check-cfg` to get the expected configs.
Details and rational can be found on the MCP: https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/743
``@rustbot`` label +F-check-cfg +S-waiting-on-MCP
r? ``@petrochenkov``
This adds the `only-apple`/`ignore-apple` compiletest directive, and
uses that basically everywhere instead of `only-macos`/`ignore-macos`.
Some of the updates in `run-make` are a bit redundant, as they use
`ignore-cross-compile` and won't run on iOS - but using Apple in these
is still more correct, so I've made that change anyhow.
Add assert_unsafe_precondition to unchecked_{add,sub,neg,mul,shl,shr} methods
(Old PR is haunted, opening a new one. See #117494 for previous discussion.)
This ensures that these preconditions are actually checked in debug mode, and hopefully should let people know if they messed up. I've also replaced the calls (I could find) in the code that use these intrinsics directly with those that use these methods, so that the asserts actually apply.
More discussions on people misusing these methods in the tracking issue: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85122.
The body of these benchmarks is close to empty but not literally empty.
This was making the runtime of the benchmarks (which are compiled
without optimizations!) flicker between 9 ns and 10 ns runtime, which
changes the padding and breaks the test. Recent changes to the standard
library have pushed the runtime closer to 10 ns when unoptimized, which
is why we haven't seen such failures before in CI.
Contributors can also induce such failures before this PR by running the
run-make tests while the system is under heavy load.
Migrate `run-make/issue-53964` to `rmake`
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
This is extremely similar to #125146. Could it be interesting to merge the two in some way? This one seems to do the same thing as the #125146, but with an added check that a useless lint is not shown.
Rewrite `core-no-oom-handling`, `issue-24445` and `issue-38237` `run-make` tests to new `rmake.rs` format
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
The test which is now called `non-pie-thread-local` has an unexplained "only-linux" flag. Could it be worth trying to remove it and changing the CI to test non-Linux platforms on it?
Remove libc from MSVC targets
``@ChrisDenton`` started working on a project to remove libc from Windows MSVC targets. I'm completing that work here.
The primary change is to cfg out the dependency in `library/`. And then there's a lot of test patching. Happy to separate this more if people want.
Migrate `run-make/issue64319` to `rmake` and rename
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
~~I noticed that the Makefile was not listed in `allowed-run-makefiles` in Tidy. Does this mean the test was being ignored?~~ EDIT: No, it was there, just not in its expected alphabetical order.
EDIT2: Perhaps it could be interesting to clean this test visually by looping over the `rustc` calls, like in #125227.
Migrate `run-make/no-cdylib-as-rdylib` to `rmake`
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
> "the test will fail if the cdylib is picked, because it doesn't export any rust symbols"
Is that true? Is there a way to verify?
I suggest maybe extending the test with: (after cleaning the directory)
```rust
rustc()
.input("bar.rs")
.crate_type("cdylib")
.run();
rustc()
.input("foo.rs")
.prefer_dynamic()
.run();
fail();
```
to make sure we're actually testing something here.
Use new utility functions/methods in run-make tests
Little cleanup using new functions/methods I added into the `run-make-support` library.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Migrate `run-make/issue-14500` to new `rmake.rs` format
Part of #121876 and the associated [Google Summer of Code project](https://blog.rust-lang.org/2024/05/01/gsoc-2024-selected-projects.html).
Note: I find suspicious that `libbar.a` is hardcoded and is not using the `STATICLIB` call to adapt to Windows platforms. Is this intentional? If not, this will need to be changed.
Rewrite 3 very similar `run-make` alloc tests to rmake
Part of #121876#121918 attempted to port these 3 tests 2 months ago. However, since then, the structure of `run-make-support` has changed a bit and new helper functions were added. Since there has been no activity on the PR, they are good low-hanging fruit to knock down, using the new functions of the current library.
There is also the removal of a useless import on a very similar test.
Migrate rustdoc scrape examples ordering
Part of https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/121876.
This one adds a lot of utility methods/functions. To prevent having too much changes at once, I didn't make the existing rmake tests use these yet but I'll send a follow-up so they all use it.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Display walltime benchmarks with subnanosecond precision
With modern CPUs running at more than one cycle per nanosecond the current precision is insufficient to resolve differences worth several cycles per iteration.
Granted, walltime benchmarks often are noisy but occasionally, especially when no allocations are involved, the difference really is just a few cycles.
example results when benchmarking 1-4 serialized ADD instructions and an empty bench body
```
running 4 tests
test add ... bench: 0.24 ns/iter (+/- 0.00)
test add2 ... bench: 0.48 ns/iter (+/- 0.01)
test add3 ... bench: 0.72 ns/iter (+/- 0.01)
test add4 ... bench: 0.96 ns/iter (+/- 0.01)
test empty ... bench: 0.24 ns/iter (+/- 0.00)
```
Document tests in the `run-make` directory (A to C)
Part of the #121876 project.
This PR adds comments to some `run-make` tests which lack one, explaining _what_ is being tested. If possible, a link to the relevant PR or Issue responsible for the test is also provided.
This will help the porting efforts to `rmake.rs`, and will also allow maintainers to focus efforts on tests which are more pertinent to port. For example, [this test](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/blob/master/tests/run-make/cat-and-grep-sanity-check/Makefile) will become useless after all tests containing `CGREP` are successfully ported.
In order to simplify review and at the suggestion of Kobzol on the rust-lang #gsoc Zulip, only the first 23 comments are part of this PR. If it is merged, future PRs will ensue commenting the rest of the tests.
Could be an UI test:
- `dep-info-doesnt-run-much`
Allow fmt to run on rmake.rs test files
As discussed with `@jieyouxu,` `rmake.rs` from the `run-make` testsuite would benefit from being formatted as well.
Only thing needed to be done for it to work: allow support for `!` in our `rustfmt.toml` file parsing.
r? `@onur-ozkan`
Add support for inputing via stdin with run-make-support
This PR adds the facility to set a input bytes that will be passed via the standard input.
This is useful for testing `rustc -` (and soon `rustdoc -`).
In #124611 took the approach of having a dedicated `run` method but it is not very convenient to use and would necessitate many functions, one for success, one for fail, ...
Instead this PR takes a different approach and allows setting the input bytes as if it were a parameter and when calling the (now custom) `output` function, we write the input bytes into stdin. I think this gives us maximum flexibility in the implementation and a simple interface for users.
To test this new logic I ported `tests/run-make/stdin-non-utf8/` to an `rmake.rs` one.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Cleanup: Rid the `rmake` test runners of `extern crate run_make_support;`
`run_make_support` is part of the *extern prelude* of `rmake` test runners rendering `extern crate run_make_support` redundant:
80451a485b/src/tools/compiletest/src/runtest.rs (L3826-L3827)
~~Contains some fmt'ing changes because I've enabled format-on-save in my editor and because we don't run `x fmt` for `rmake` test runners yet (this gets addressed by #124613). I can revert those if you'd like me to.~~ (reverted)
r? jieyouxu or testing-devex(?) or boostrap(?)
Port repr128-dwarf run-make test to rmake
This PR ports the repr128-dwarf run-make test to rmake, using the `gimli` crate instead of the `llvm-dwarfdump` command.
Note that this PR changes `rmake.rs` files to be compiled with the 2021 edition (previously no edition was passed to `rustc`, meaning they were compiled with the 2015 edition). This means that `panic!("{variable}")` will now work as expected in `rmake.rs` files (there's already a usage in the [wasm-symbols-not-exported test](aca749eefc/tests/run-make/wasm-symbols-not-exported/rmake.rs (L34)) that this will fix).
Tracking issue: #121876
Rewrite the `no-input-file.stderr` test in Rust and support diff
Rewrite the `no-input-file.stderr` test from #121876.
Use the `similar` lib to replace the `diff` command.
Fix ICE when there is a non-Unicode entry in the incremental crate directory
Fix the ICE that occurs when there is a non-Unicode entry in the incremental crate directory by replacing uses of `to_string_lossy` + `assert_no_characters_lost` with `to_str`. The added test would cause the compiler to ICE before this PR.
Codegen ZSTs without an allocation
This makes sure that &[] is equivalent to unsafe code (from_raw_parts(dangling, 0)). No new stable guarantee is intended about whether or not we do this, this is just an optimization.
This regressed in #67000 (no comments I can see about that regression in the PR, though it did change the test modified here). We had previously performed this optimization since #63635.
Port the 2 `rust-lld` run-make tests to `rmake`
In preparation for finalizing most of the `rust-lld` work, this PR ports the following tests to `rmake`:
- `tests/run-make/rust-lld`
- `tests/run-make/rust-lld-custom-target`
As they use `$(CGREP) -e` I added `regex` as an exported dependency to the `run_make_support` library.
Unfortunately, the most recent versions depend on `memchr` 2.6.0 but it's currently pinned at 2.5.0 in the workspace, and therefore had to settle for the older `regex-1.8.0`.
r? `@jieyouxu`
Allow workproducts without object files.
This pull request partially reverts changes from e16c3b4a44
Original motivation for this assert was described with "A WorkProduct without a saved file is useless"
which was true at the time but now it is possible to have work products with other types of files
(llvm-ir, asm, etc) and there are bugreports for this failure:
For example: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123695
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123234
Now existing `assert` and `.unwrap_or_else` are unified into a single
check that emits slightly more user friendly error message if an object
files was meant to be produced but it's missing
This pull request partially reverts changes from e16c3b4a44
Original motivation for this assert was described with "A WorkProduct without a saved file is useless"
which was true at the time but now it is possible to have work products with other types of files
(llvm-ir, asm, etc) and there are bugreports for this failure:
For example: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123695
Fixes https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/123234
Now existing `assert` and `.unwrap_or_else` are unified into a single
check that emits slightly more user friendly error message if an object
files was meant to be produced but it's missing
Linker flavors next steps: linker features
This is my understanding of the first step towards `@petrochenkov's` vision for the future of linker flavors, described in https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/pull/119906#issuecomment-1895693162 and the discussion that followed.
To summarize: having `Cc` and `Lld` embedded in linker flavors creates tension about naming, and a combinatorial explosion of flavors for each new linker feature we'd want to use. Linker features are an extension mechanism that is complementary to principal flavors, with benefits described in #119906.
The most immediate use of this flag would be to turn self-contained linking on and off via features instead of flavors. For example, `-Clinker-features=+/-lld` would toggle using lld instead of selecting a precise flavor, and would be "generic" and work cross-platform (whereas linker flavors are currently more tied to targets). Under this scheme, MCP510 is expected to be `-Clink-self-contained=+linker -Zlinker-features=+lld -Zunstable-options` (though for the time being, the original flags using lld-cc flavors still work).
I purposefully didn't add or document CLI support for `+/-cc`, as it would be a noop right now. I only expect that we'd initially want to stabilize `+/-lld` to begin with.
r? `@petrochenkov`
You had requested that minimal churn would be done to the 230 target specs and this does none yet: the linker features are inferred from the flavor since they're currently isomorphic. We of course expect this to change sooner rather than later.
In the future, we can allow targets to define linker features independently from their flavor, and remove the cc and lld components from the flavors to use the features instead, this actually doesn't need to block stabilization, as we discussed.
(Best reviewed per commit)
Set the host library path in run-make v2
When the build is configured with `[rust] rpath = false`, we need to set
`LD_LIBRARY_PATH` (or equivalent) to what would have been the `RPATH`,
so the compiler can find its own libraries. The old `tools.mk` code has
this environment prefixed in the `$(BARE_RUSTC)` variable, so we just
need to wire up something similar for run-make v2.
This is now set while building each `rmake.rs` itself, as well as in the
`rust-make-support` helpers for `rustc` and `rustdoc` commands. This is
also available in a `set_host_rpath` function for manual commands, like
in the `compiler-builtins` test.
When the build is configured with `[rust] rpath = false`, we need to set
`LD_LIBRARY_PATH` (or equivalent) to what would have been the `RPATH`,
so the compiler can find its own libraries. The old `tools.mk` code has
this environment prefixed in the `$(BARE_RUSTC)` variable, so we just
need to wire up something similar for run-make v2.
This is now set while building each `rmake.rs` itself, as well as in the
`rust-make-support` helpers for `rustc` and `rustdoc` commands. This is
also available in a `set_host_rpath` function for manual commands, like
in the `compiler-builtins` test.
